It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Disagree too with this thesis. For the reasons given already above, CR and SF are very similiar in this way but for me personally i feel CR has the better story line.
<font color=blue size=7><b>"There's really more of a true Ian Fleming story in [LTK's] script than in most of the post-60s Bond movies." (Raymond Benson)</b></font>
Hey! @Thunderfinger! @StoneShi don't do no quotes.
Should have told you something...
<font color=blue size=7><b>Moore's Bond performances are more consistent than Connery's.</b></font>
Well he sort of has 2 performances... LALD / TMWTGG and then the rest. I think in the first two, someone must have told him to be like Connery before they let him do his own thing (and was much better for it)
Specifically, he was kind of a dick in TMWTGG.....
Let's examine this film by film, shall we?
DN: Connery's still new to the role, so he has quite developed the confidence and swagger that would become a hallmark. Still a dynamic, influential performance.
FRWL: At the height of his powers here, he's the very picture of a tough as nails yet suave secret agent.
GF: See above, but leaning more toward suavity.
TB: As cool as ever, but the dangerous aspect is starting to suffer a little. The quality of the film as a whole might have an effect here.
YOLT: Connery's clearly starting to get bored in the role and is letting his natural charisma carry him through.
DAF: In it for the paycheck, and that's that. Old, bald, and fat.
LALD: Moore's primary goal here is not to be Connery, and hasn't established his own voice.
TMWTGG: A bad Connery imitation, made worse by their drastically different natural gifts.
TSWLM: Moore finally finds his voice, and his humorous charisma with just enough edge carries the movie.
MR: See above.
FYEO: Moore emphasizes the danger and the edge, along with Bond's advancing age.
OP: The same as FYEO, although he lapses a bit too far into silliness, and his age is starting to take its toll.
AVTAK: He's 58, which is far too old for any self-respecting Bond actor.
By my tally, we have 2 classic performances from Connery, two great ones, an average one and a bad one.
For Moore, we have two classic performances, two great ones, an average one, and two bad ones.
Perhaps Connery is technically less consistent because his highs were higher, but he doesn't seem appreciably more inconsistent than Moore.
I would agree with this thesis and highlight the very good observations by samuel as my reason.
I actually think his performance in LALD and TMWTGG are maybe his best, and in Gun one of the few good things about the movie.
Not sure about LALD one of his best performances, but certainly one the very best Bonds I(=Great,great entertainment!!!), but absolutely agree with every word about TMWTGG. The wolfish smile to M after he reassures him,that Scaramangas Dead would get him back on duty is to me his only believable dangerous look in all of his Bonds. Love it.
Funnily enough the slide whistle is the one outrageous moment I can tolerate. The rest (school-girls doing Karate, Britt Eckland talking over the radio in the car, Britt Eckland triggering the Solex with her arse cheeks, Bond pushing the kid into the canal) I loathe.
His later Bond movies may have been more consistent with Moore's style, but I find him far better when he was still finding his way in TMWTGG. Maybe not as personal a performance and influenced by Connery, but far more satisfying. And deserving a much better movie than TMWTGG.
So to clarify - you actually think an elephant pushing JW in the canal and kung fu schoolgirls were a positive contribution to the series?
I just hope for your sake that that doesn't end up being written on your tombstone one day because it would be a pretty damning epitaph to anyone's life.
Anyway in terms of the question posed:
Sean
DN - pretty much perfect
FRWL - perfecter
GF - perfect film Bond but seems to be starting to play himself rather than the character of the first film.
TB - same as GF but turned up to 11.
YOLT - just can't be arsed.
DAF - still can't be arsed but knows he's making a shit load of cash and gets time off to play golf with Guy Hamilton so having a great time.
NSNA - on sparkling form - a return to his GF and TB days - despite the shambles around him.
Rog
LALD - seems to be finding his feet slightly and not quite up to the Rog of later years.
TMWTGG - gives a pretty good performance in what could have been the hardest edged Moore film if it hadn't been littered with embarrassing comedy moments.
TSWLM - just like Sean finally nails his own take on the perfect film Bond.
MR - another quintessential Rog performance as Bond.
FYEO - another fine Rog performance with some good serious moments despite his comedy strengths being toned down a bit.
OP - on a par with TSWLM. In fact I think it might actually be better as there are some really superb suspenseful moments during the bomb countdown which Rog nails along with his usual classic Rog moments.
AVTAK - a very small drop off but that's probably more to do with the script and his age rather than any fault lying with Rog's performance.
However we are not discussing the merits of their performances but consistency and on this question, like Partridge in the first episode of KNKY(WAP), I have to say I'm firmly in the Roger camp.
Sean has two perfect Fleming Bond performances in DN and FRWL, two perfect film Bond performances in GF and TB and then to varying degrees just turns up for the money and doesn't have his heart in it in the other three.
Rog has two slightly uneven performances in LALD and TMWTGG but then a superbly consistent run of 4 perfectly assured performances with only a slight drop off for AVTAK.
So while once Sean starts getting famous he can't be bothered, Rog is professional to the hilt. He knows his strengths and plays to them. He's never going to deliver a Dalton or Craig performance but there will be no one who will ever deliver pure entertaining Bond with such a twinkle as Sir Rog and to do it so well time and time again and make it look effortless just goes to show what a legend he really is.
I can't help but say that Connery-style.
My problem with some of Moore's performances is that, while he seemed confident most if not all the time, in several of his films Rog just didn't feel like Bond. In Spy, FYEO and OP I believe he is an agent going about doing his job like a professional. That's why I think those three are his best overall performances. He plays the role with a good mix of authority and gentlemanly charm (despite his pretty poor fight scenes). In MR and AVTAK he's an ageing dude either sleazing it up or posing quite a bit of the time.
:D
There's literally nothing I can say to that except I presume you're also a big fan of Mrs Brown's Boys?